Let's read the motion before passing judgement

Courtesy of Paul Wells

“the First Report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, presented on Thursday, October 28, 2004, be not now concurred in, but that it be recommitted to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts with instruction that it amend the same so as to recommend that the government resign because of its failure to address the deficiencies in governance of the public service addressed in the report.”.

Emphasis mine, of course. I believe a reasonably bookish 12-year-old could understand this. A report comes wheeling out of a committee somewhere. The Commons is invited:
• to say it disagrees with the report ("not now concurred in");
• to send it back to the committee ("recommitted to the Standing Committee");
• to invite the committee to call for the government's resignation ("amend the same so as to recommend...").

Maybe I need it spelled out to me in small words, but where does the Oppostion get the authority to use this motion as a non-confidence since this motion is addressed to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts? According to parliamentary rules, the motion makes no sense.

While I may not be Paul Martin's biggest fan, I see the Conservative's display last night as nothing short of parliamentary bullying.